A charming romance currently on HBO,
“The Girl in the Café” is about a lonely, painfully shy,
50-something diplomat who meets a young woman who, with kind
insight, gently pierces through his layers of shell to ignite his
great heart to action.
A charming romance currently on HBO, “The Girl in the Café” is about a lonely, painfully shy, 50-something diplomat who meets a young woman who, with kind insight, gently pierces through his layers of shell to ignite his great heart to action.
The dramatic backdrop is the 2005 G-8 Summit, chaired by the British, which, like the recent actual G-8 Summit, sought concrete action on strategies for helping relieve world poverty. After inviting the young woman to accompany him to the summit, he – and everyone else – discovers she has an embarrassing tendency to speak plainly during social occasions, calling on the world’s most powerful people to forgo “politics as usual” and truly do what’s needed – “to get real,” so to speak – to save the world’s poor from needless death. Aggravating trait, that – or refreshing, depending on your point of view.
According to “Miss Manners’ Guide to Excruciatingly Correct Behavior,” it’s aggravating. Her section on Advanced Civilization, which addresses “Protocol,” says it’s unacceptable when meeting any government official in a social setting to comment on his position on an issue or discuss politics. So, when running into government officials around town, it’s not OK to half-joke “what was THAT?,” my response to the Chamber of Commerce business luncheon last month hosting San Jose Mayor Ron Gonzales and his aides who are working on the Coyote Valley project. Nor should I say to Mayor Gonzales, “you were joking, right?” Better to stick to comments on the weather, she advises.
My consternation began with the warm fuzzies with which Mayor Gonzales was introduced. “A very good friend,” Mayor Kennedy claimed. I’m glad my good friends aren’t the type I have to threaten to sue in order for them to take seriously my pleas to be included in the decisions that significantly impact my life.
Soon after, Mayor Gonzales proclaimed his pride over San Jose’s outreach efforts, and praised his staff for its “impressive community outreach.”
“We’ve done an outstanding job,” said Gonzales, straining his back as he patted it (like Dilbert’s manager). Well, “conducting outreach” shouldn’t be the measurement of success; “gaining meaningful input from community stakeholders” should be. Anyone can put an announcement in the paper and toss some flyers around.
During Q&A, Mayor Gonzales employed a strategy used by many politicians these days, and which I find tiresome: answering questions with many words that don’t provide specific answers, usually used to confuse listeners into believing the question is answered, when actually it’s not, or to hide the fact that somewhere in all that verbiage is a “yes” or a “no.”
When asked whether the Morgan Hill school district should turn into an urban district (as the new schools planned for Coyote Valley follow urban design principles), or should it consider talking to another district about taking these schools, the answer took a while to end with “that’s something we’ll discuss.”
When asked if it was true that, after assuring the community that the development would adhere to specific “triggers,” they were now seeking to eliminate the triggers, he said, exasperated, “it’s amazing how people misread, misunderstand, misreport … information.” He went on to explain what the triggers are, and how the project shouldn’t be restrained by them. He then slipped in that they were indeed seeking to change the current triggers. (Sounds like elimination to me).
Ignorant of the value of protocol in my 20s, I do realize it now, and believe it would have been unseemly to dispute the true handling of the project at the luncheon. However, I felt like I was living in some alternate universe with respect to the relationship between Morgan Hill and San Jose.
To say “Coyote Valley is very important to us, and we look forward to working with San Jose on this development so important to both of our communities” or “we know that Morgan Hill hasn’t been entirely satisfied with the process, but we look forward to working with you toward resolution and moving on” would have been entirely appropriate, because both are true, and don’t make us dizzy with “spin.”
Somehow, we need to find a way to view acknowledging “the elephant in the room” as positive, rather than as impolite. Hopefully, Miss Manners will include “How to respond to ‘spin’ ” in her next book to help taxpayers and voters overcome politicians’ manner of obfuscation, and, like the girl in the café, call on them – politely, of course – to forgo “politics as usual”, and “get real.”
